28 Days Later...

Rating: 9/10 (3 July 2007)

It's not often Britain produces a post apocalyptic drama of the quality of 28 Days Later. But then it's not often Britain produces a director of the calibre of Danny Boyle. From the breathtaking opening sequences of Cillian Murphy's Jim, awaking four weeks after a catastrophic viral outbreak and wandering the deserted streets of London (in a scene clearly inspired by Day Of The Triffids) to the final reel's horrific and violent conclusion, this is a film that stuns and awes with a variety of tactics.
Firstly, that opening sequence.outstanding! Never has London been captured looking so still and convincingly lifeless. To call it atmospheric does not do it justice and full credit must be given to Boyle for utilising digital cameras to enable him to capture such effect. The entire film is shot on digital camera and there are a lot of hand-held shots which were obviously used so that they could get some extremely tricky shots done quickly and they also put the viewer in the thick of the action.
When Jim does find signs of life, he soon wishes he hadn't as he encounters people stricken with a virus turning them into contagious violent sociopaths. Encountering other survivors, 28 Days Later tells the story of this disparate group and their struggle to survive in an incredibly hostile world where even potential saviours are not what they seem. As with all great zombie films (pedants insist "It's not a zombie film" but whatever) the most sinister threat does not come from the infected, but from conflicting interests between the survivors. This is a film about people, with zombies, and not the other way around. It is not a horror film it is a human drama, mainly about relationships. The final set piece is the only time we descend into horror film territory with a thunderstorm and many more typically horror conventions being utilised.
It could be argued that 28 Days Later struggles to live up to the promise established in it's opening half hour, but when you consider just what a feat of film making this first 30 minutes is, this is really scant criticism. Besides which itcouldn't be argued that the dip in quality is any where near substantial enough as to render the rest of the film uninteresting.
Unlike the redundant Dawn Of The Dead remake that came soon after this film the violence is not forgettable nor gratuitous. There is action, but it feels gritty rather than stylish and unlike that film, the violent scenes are memorable because we have feelings towards the characters as they are more developed than stereotypes.
Cillian Murphy turns in agreat breakthrough performance as Jim. He displays the appropriate level of confusion and disbelief at the beginning and shows compassion to the people he meets before finally being utterly merciless to those who've wronged him and tried to harm his companions. Credit must also go to Christopher Eccleston who puts in a solid performance as Major Henry West, commanding officer of a group of soldiers who is easily the most interesting character in the film. One gets the impression that before the outbreak, the Major was an upstanding English gentleman and model soldier. However when we meet him he is in an extraordinary situation and he is prepared to be merciless toward those he is trusted to protect in order to maintain his position. He makes for a most interesting villain as it would be too easy to simply label him a "bad guy", rather he is a desperate man stuck between a rock and a hard place. Eccleston's performance makes it clear that he is not at ease with what he is trying to do, but that he feels it to be the more preferable of his available options.
A treasure of modern British cinema, Danny Boyle continues to show he is not confined by the concept of genre and is one of the best British directors going. Cillian Murphy's breakthrough (and arguably still his best) role, as well as a stunning villainous turn from Chris Eccleston make this a total must see. Just steer clear of that godawful sequel....